2025 (6) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or informing the Board of ZEEL, and held it amounting to violation of Regulations 4(1) and 4(2)(f) of the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (PFUTP Regulations) and Regulation 4(2) (f) sub-regulation (i) (1) and (2), (ii) (7), (iii) (3), (iii) (6) (iii) (7) of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 (LODR Regulations). By the impugned order, SEBI has restrained the appellant from holding the position of a Director or a Key Managerial Position ('KMP' for short) in companies, namely, ZEEL, Zee Media Corporation Ltd, Zee Studios Ltd, Zee Akaash News Pvt. Ltd or subsidiary companies. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has filed this Appeal. 2. There is delay of 100 days in filing the appeal. The memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a miscellaneous application seeking condonation of delay. The grounds pleaded by the Appellant seeking condonation of delay are as follows:- • the appellant regularly travels to participate in various social purposes; • the appellant had medical appointments between the date of passing of the impugned order and filing thi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... • This Appeal is fully covered by the order of this Tribunal in Punit Goenka v. SEBI (Appeal No. 714 of 2023 decided on 30.10.2023) and the said order has not been challenged by the SEBI. • That the delay occurred in filing the Appeal is due to unavoidable circumstances, which were beyond appellant's control and the same are unintentional. • That there has been no malafide or deliberate attempt on appellant's part to prolong and/or protract the proceeding. In support of his submissions he relied upon Ningappa Thotappa Angadi v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (Ningappa Thotappa Angadi v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2020) 19 SCC 599) and prayed to condone the delay of 100 days in filing the Appeal. 7. Opposing the application for condonation of delay, Shri Darius Khambatta, learned Senior Advocate for the SEBI submitted: That the appeal is time barred with a delay of 100 days. • Appellant's reliance on the judgment in Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (Dead) through Legal Representatives v. Special Land Acquisition Officer is not applicable as it relates to exercise of special plenary powers by Hon'ble Supreme Court of In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e rival contentions and perused the records. 10. Undisputed facts of the case are, appellant has challenged the order dated August 14, 2023 passed by Chairman, SEBI. The very same order was challenged by appellant's son, Shri Punit Goenka in Appeal No.714 of 2023. SEBI has strongly opposed the delay in filing this appeal contending inter alia that appellant has not shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 11. Therefore, the point for consideration is whether the cause shown by the appellant is sufficient to condone the delay? 12. Admittedly, appellant was a Non-Executive Director and Chairman of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. 13. The causes shown by the appellant for the delay in approaching this Tribunal are, that he was travelling to participate in various social purposes, he had medical appointments and he had decided to change his advocates. 14. Shri Sanchetti, learned Senior advocate for the appellant, has placed reliance on Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (Dead) through Legal Representatives v. Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Another and contented that appellant's case is similar to Punit Goenka decided by this Trib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uting his case, and unless satisfactory explanation is furnished the Court should not allow the application for condonation of delay. 19. In Pathapati Subba Reddy after considering various authorities right from Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd., (AIR 1962 SC 361) it is held that the law of limitation is based upon the public policy and there should be an end to the litigation by forfeiting the right of remedy rather than the right itself and that delay is not to be condoned merely because some other persons have been granted relief. 20. It is also noted in Pathapati Subba Reddy that a Court cannot grant exemption from limitation on equitable consideration as held in Maqbul Ahmad and Ors. vs. Onkar Pratap Narain Singh and Ors (AIR 1935 PC 85). The Court has time and again repeated that when mandatory provision is not complied with and delay is not properly, satisfactorily and convincingly explained, it ought not to condone the delay on sympathetic grounds alone. 21. We may record that in Basawaraj and Patapatti Subba Reddy cited by Shri Khambatta the Apex Court was dealing with the aspect of 'sufficient cause' and held that, if the delay is not convinci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bouring areas. He also participated in various events and participated in the inauguration of the Handball Training Centre at Village Satrod, Hisar. 4 September 10, 2023 The Appellant visited Delhi, Noida and other neighbouring areas. He also visited Bharat Mandapam and the G-20 Summit. 5 September 12, 2023-September 13, 2023 The Appellant was travelling outside the country to Tajikistan (Dushanbe). 6 September 14, 2023-September 17, 2023 The Appellant visited Lucknow and travelled to other neighbouring areas for some meetings/events. 7 September 23, 2023-October 2, 2023. The Appellant visited Delhi, Noida and other neighbouring areas. During his visit there he took part in various social welfare events such as the Agroha Dham Yatra, the Yuva Mitra Mandal Program at Jind and the Women Empowerment Life Skill certificate distribution program at Hisar. 8 October 16, 2023-October 25, 2023 The Appellant travelled to Bhopal and thereafter visited Delhi and other neighbouring areas. He also participated in various meetings, events etc. 9 October 26, 2023 The Appellant visited Keshod. 10 October 31, 2023-November 4, 2023 The Ap....
TaxTMI